United States v. Henry Timbrook

Fifth Circuit

United States v. Henry Timbrook

448 F.2d 1314, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 7782

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided October 1, 1971·No. 71-1367_1·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Henry Timbrook appeals from judgment of guilty and sentence to five eon- *1315 current terms of confinement for three years each, following jury verdicts of guilty under a 5-count indictment charging violations of Title 18, U.S.C., Sections 659, 2314 and 2315. The appeal challenges (1) the correctness of the trial court’s denial of motions for acquittal as to each count made at the close of the prosecution’s case and renewed at the close of the appellant’s case, and (2) the court’s jury instructions as to permissible inferences arising from proof of possession of recently stolen property. The appellant also asserts that the jury’s verdict was contrary to the law and the evidence before the trial court and jury.

After a careful review of the record, we fail to find error demonstrated in either particular asserted. The proof amply supported the verdict and the jury charge was unexceptionable.

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. See Glasser v. United States, 1944, 315 U.S. 60, 62 S.Ct. 457, 86 L.Ed. 680.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Henry Timbrook appeals from judgment of guilty and sentence to five eon- *1315 current terms of confinement for three years each, following jury verdicts of guilty under a 5-count indictment charging violations of Title 18, U.S.C., Sections 659, 2314 and 2315. The appeal challenges (1) the correctness of the trial court’s denial of motions for acquittal as to each count made at the close of the prosecution’s case and renewed at the close of the appellant’s case, and (2) the court’s jury instructions as to permissible inferences arising from proof of possession of recently stolen property. The appellant also asserts that the jury’s verdict was contrary to the law and the evidence before the trial court and jury.

After a careful review of the record, we fail to find error demonstrated in either particular asserted. The proof amply supported the verdict and the jury charge was unexceptionable.

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. See Glasser v. United States, 1944, 315 U.S. 60, 62 S.Ct. 457, 86 L.Ed. 680.

United States v. Henry Timbrook, 448 F.2d 1314, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 7782 (5th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

448 F.2d 1314 (United States v. Henry Timbrook) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related